TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25

[Ram Sabaratnam]

Hi @Andrei Radu and @Ram Sabaratnam

I trust you are well.

I work full-time, I cannot possibly attend open days and I am struggling to understand the firm's competitive edge.

Firms seem to be very similar when it comes to their practice areas, specifically their transactional expertise.
How do you distinguish the M&A practice of one firm from another? A lot of firms seem to work on similar deals and with similar clients and I am struggling. Is there a specific element that I need to focus on?
Thank you in advance.

Hi @AS24

It's completely alright that you're not able to attend open days - during my own applications, I think I only managed to attend one, as I was working full-time. You're also absolutely right that many firms work on similar deals, particularly in M&A. That said, there are still ways to differentiate between them, and below I've shared a few ideas to help you make more granular comparisons.

One thing to consider is the industries or sectors a firm's M&A work focuses on. For example, firms like Cooley and Goodwin are especially known for advising on M&A deals in the tech and life sciences sectors. Other firms, like Willkie, are more "sectorally agnostic," meaning they handle M&A work across a wide variety of industries. Which type of firm might suit you best depends on your own interests. Personally, I was drawn to firms that specialised in sectors I had a genuine passion for, but I’ve met others who preferred variety and, as a result, were more interested in firms that had strengths in a wider range of industries. A firm’s sectoral strengths can give you a good sense of how their M&A practice differs from others.

You could also focus on the different elements of M&A transactions. Some firms are particularly well-regarded for their expertise in areas like financing, advising on regulatory issues, or cross-border deals. For instance, Freshfields is known for its strength in advisory work, particularly on antitrust and tax aspects of M&A, in addition to its corporate M&A work. Other firms stand out for their relationships and skills in structuring the financing side of deals. It really depends on what you’re most interested in, but thinking about these distinctions can help you see how a firm's M&A capabilities varies from those of another.

Finally, you could also consider the types of clients the firm is known for advising in M&A transactions. Taking Cooley again as an example, they have a strong reputation for advising high-growth startups and venture capital clients, which sets them apart from firms that focus more on later-stage companies or multinational corporations. Some firms, meanwhile, work with clients throughout their business lifecycle. Understanding the firm's client base can give you a clearer picture of how their M&A practice stands out. You can often get a sense of this by researching recent deals and looking at Chambers and Legal 500 rankings.

I hope this helps and definitely let us know if you have any other questions!

 

[emma.d]

Hi, I have two questions.

1) I'm applying for the Weil Open Day and the first question is 'Please tell us why you are interested in attending an insight day at Weil. What do you think you will gain from it? How will this help you with your long term career goals?' would it be okay to talk about their M&A practice? Is this big for them?

2) I have an Open Day coming up and part of the day includes an 'Interactive Private Equity Workshop'. Could anyone recommend any resources/how to prepare for this because I really know nothing about private equity.

Thank you

 

[Apple]

Hi, I have two questions.

1) I'm applying for the Weil Open Day and the first question is 'Please tell us why you are interested in attending an insight day at Weil. What do you think you will gain from it? How will this help you with your long term career goals?' would it be okay to talk about their M&A practice? Is this big for them?

2) I have an Open Day coming up and part of the day includes an 'Interactive Private Equity Workshop'. Could anyone recommend any resources/how to prepare for this because I really know nothing about private equity.

Thank you

In short, private equity firms buy distressed companies, make improvements to increase its profitability, then sell (exit) about 5 years later = profit.

 

[Broadwater]

In short, private equity firms buy distressed companies, make improvements to increase its profitability, then sell (exit) about 5 years later = profit.

Broadly you’re right but it is by no means limited to distressed companies. Large-cap PE firms often acquire mature public companies with reliable cashflows. Otherwise the target company wouldn’t be able to service its debt. Distressed investing is just one of many strategies in PE.

For the OP, I think Investopedia is a good starting point

 

[NJS]

Hi, I have two questions.

1) I'm applying for the Weil Open Day and the first question is 'Please tell us why you are interested in attending an insight day at Weil. What do you think you will gain from it? How will this help you with your long term career goals?' would it be okay to talk about their M&A practice? Is this big for them?

2) I have an Open Day coming up and part of the day includes an 'Interactive Private Equity Workshop'. Could anyone recommend any resources/how to prepare for this because I really know nothing about private equity.

Thank you

PE is their bread 🥖 and butter 🧈

 

[NJS]

Hi @Jessica Booker, I did two vac schemes over the summer, took an L on both, but was encouraged to reapply, would it be okay to mention my experience on those schemes in their respective application forms, just to spice up my answers from last year, not much has changed for me since the summer in terms of experience so was wondering if that would be a good way to provide a different answer?

 

[Runsim]

I don't think it is worthwhile doing SQE1 on top of the LPC. You'd still have to declare your LPC results for most firms.

It will depend on the firm - some firms set an LPC requirement for their sponsored students, and if they do they would apply the same criteria to anyone who self-funded. But there are plenty of firms who don't do this and will not need a commendation or above in the LPC. As you have got a first in your undergraduate degree, this is also a major advantage and one that firms will weigh up carefully alongside your LPC results.

Thank you Jessica, that provides a lot of clarity!

 

[unknownnn7372]

Should I assume a PFO for sidley as I still haven't heard back lol

 

[Aspiringsolicitor01]

Just took the HSF test. That was 😰
My feedback report is showing 4 values/behaviours positively and 2 negatively. Anyone get similar and what was the verdict of the HSF recruitment team?

 

[Runsim]

Hiya @Runsim


Just to build off the typically excellent advice of @Jessica Booker, I wanted to reiterate the importance of remembering that not every firm has rigid grade cut-offs. There are also plenty of fantastic firms that value other qualities just as highly as academic performance. As Jess mentioned, your first-class undergraduate will be helpful. But if you're still worried, I'd encourage you to target firms with more flexible requirements. This will also help you spend your time making applications where you're more likely to succeed. If you have mitigating circumstances, make sure to highlight them clearly in your applications.

As someone who has myself experienced academic challenges, another great way to strengthen your applications is by gaining and demonstrating relevant work experience. I should emphasise here that this doesn’t necessarily have to be in the legal sector. Before my first vacation scheme, most of my work experience was outside of the legal profession. Experience in roles that develop transferable skills (e.g. communication, teamwork, problem-solving, or leadership) can demonstrate that you have what it takes to be a strong trainee and future lawyer.

Also, framing plays an important role here. Despite a handful of weak grades, I've made sure to discuss everything from my deep involvement in volunteering, improvised comedy, and student societies to demonstrate my skills and commitment. These experiences, combined with your academic background, paint a fuller picture for recruiters. Best of luck with your application!

Thank you so much Ram! Really helpful!

 

[BonanzaBih_]

How long do we get to answer for the Simmons VI part of the assessment? trying to practice and it would be nice to know what time limits to set for myself!

 

[fingersarecrossed]

When a law firm says to do the watson glaser within 5 days, does it mean before midnight of the 5th day? or until 23:59 on the 5th day? or before the time you received the email?

 

[AS24]

Hi @AS24

It's completely alright that you're not able to attend open days - during my own applications, I think I only managed to attend one, as I was working full-time. You're also absolutely right that many firms work on similar deals, particularly in M&A. That said, there are still ways to differentiate between them, and below I've shared a few ideas to help you make more granular comparisons.

One thing to consider is the industries or sectors a firm's M&A work focuses on. For example, firms like Cooley and Goodwin are especially known for advising on M&A deals in the tech and life sciences sectors. Other firms, like Willkie, are more "sectorally agnostic," meaning they handle M&A work across a wide variety of industries. Which type of firm might suit you best depends on your own interests. Personally, I was drawn to firms that specialised in sectors I had a genuine passion for, but I’ve met others who preferred variety and, as a result, were more interested in firms that had strengths in a wider range of industries. A firm’s sectoral strengths can give you a good sense of how their M&A practice differs from others.

You could also focus on the different elements of M&A transactions. Some firms are particularly well-regarded for their expertise in areas like financing, advising on regulatory issues, or cross-border deals. For instance, Freshfields is known for its strength in advisory work, particularly on antitrust and tax aspects of M&A, in addition to its corporate M&A work. Other firms stand out for their relationships and skills in structuring the financing side of deals. It really depends on what you’re most interested in, but thinking about these distinctions can help you see how a firm's M&A capabilities varies from those of another.

Finally, you could also consider the types of clients the firm is known for advising in M&A transactions. Taking Cooley again as an example, they have a strong reputation for advising high-growth startups and venture capital clients, which sets them apart from firms that focus more on later-stage companies or multinational corporations. Some firms, meanwhile, work with clients throughout their business lifecycle. Understanding the firm's client base can give you a clearer picture of how their M&A practice stands out. You can often get a sense of this by researching recent deals and looking at Chambers and Legal 500 rankings.

I hope this helps and definitely let us know if you have any other questions!

Thank you so much @Ram Sabaratnam

 

[Andrei Radu]

Hi @Andrei Radu and @Ram Sabaratnam

I trust you are well.

I work full-time, I cannot possibly attend open days and I am struggling to understand the firm's competitive edge.

Firms seem to be very similar when it comes to their practice areas, specifically their transactional expertise.
How do you distinguish the M&A practice of one firm from another? A lot of firms seem to work on similar deals and with similar clients and I am struggling. Is there a specific element that I need to focus on?
Thank you in advance.

Hey @AS24! Just to add to @Ram Sabaratnam's great response, I've copied bellow an answer I gave to a similar question asked by another user. For context, he asked more broadly about how he can individuate a firm's practice areas beyond just ascertaining whether they are reputable or not (using Legal 500/Chambers rankings). Essentially, their worry was that if you do not find anything more specific, you will not be able to discuss practice areas as a convincing 'Why this firm' reason, as many competitors would have similarly strong reputations for it. While this is a slightly more general analysis of how to use practice areas as a 'Why the firm' reason, I think you will find everything applies in the context of trying to formulate a specific corporate M&A-based motivation.

• I think that it is still fine to discuss a practice area as a reason for why the firm, as long as (i) while the strength/reputation/other relevant features of the practice area may not differentiate the firm from every single competitor, it still differentiates it from most of them; and (ii) if taken in conjunction with your other 'Why the firm' reasons, there would be no other firm this equally applies to. In practice it may be hard to find multiple truly unique USPs for every firm, but what you may find more easily is a set of characteristics only present at few other firm. which, when taken together, make your firm unique.
  
  However, I will add that although general reputation/market recognition is an important feature in assessing a firm's practice area, it does not necessarily tell the full story. Other aspects you may consider include: what is the size of the practice area within the firm, and how important of a revenue generator is it? how many practitioners and partners does it have, and does it punch above its weight in terms of impact when compared to the sizes of similarly ranked firms? what is the history of the practice area within the firm - has it seen a lot of recent growth, or has it always been a core part of the firm's practice? and what are the firm's plans in the future for it? does the firm have a very strong reputation only in the UK, or also in other important jurisdictions and globally? are there any specific features of the practice's client base as compared to that of its rivals'? are there any particular sectors that the practice has particular expertise in? how is the practice areas subdivided between different teams? are there any specific high-end mandates that the firm has recently won - and what might you infer from that regarding the market position of the firm's practice area as compared to that of its rivals'? are there any more specific awards and recognitions for the relevant practice area, besides the usual Chambers/Legal 500 rankings? when taken together with other strong practice areas of the firm, are there significant cross-selling opportunities? When you start researching all of these questions, you will find that although initially two practices might have looked very similar because they had the same Chambers band ranking, they have many features that can differentiate them. Once you identify those, you can consider why those more specific features could be of benefit you/be of interest. This way, you can eventually end up with a truly unique practice-area based USP.
  
  
• To give you a more concrete example - when I was applying to Davis Polk, I saw they had a band 5 Chambers UK corporate M&A ranking. Initially, I thought it would be difficult to write a persuasive USP based on that, as there were other firms with higher corporate M&A Chambers UK rankings. However, upon further research, I found out that (i) Davis Polk had s significantly smaller corporate M&A practice than any of the other ranked firms - with less than 1/3 of the total number of practitioners than similarly ranked firms; (ii) Davis Polk was ranked as the most efficient corporate practice in the UK, with the highest Revenue Per Lawyer (RPL) and Revenue Per Partner (RPP) of any firm; (iii) Davis Polk globally had the highest average corporate deal value of any firm - suggesting a low volume/high value model; (iv) Davis Polk had won various corporate/PE deal of the year or team of the year awards. When taking all these factors together, it was easy to think of an USP in terms of Davis Polk a small but extremely high quality practice, which I could then connect to my motivations to be a become a great corporate lawyer and to work in small teams.

 

[AS24]

Hey @AS24! Just to add to @Ram Sabaratnam's great response, I've copied bellow an answer I gave to a similar question asked by another user. For context, he asked more broadly about how he can individuate a firm's practice areas beyond just ascertaining whether they are reputable or not (using Legal 500/Chambers rankings). Essentially, their worry was that if you do not find anything more specific, you will not be able to discuss practice areas as a convincing 'Why this firm' reason, as many competitors would have similarly strong reputations for it. While this is a slightly more general analysis of how to use practice areas as a 'Why the firm' reason, I think you will find everything applies in the context of trying to formulate a specific corporate M&A-based motivation.

• I think that it is still fine to discuss a practice area as a reason for why the firm, as long as (i) while the strength/reputation/other relevant features of the practice area may not differentiate the firm from every single competitor, it still differentiates it from most of them; and (ii) if taken in conjunction with your other 'Why the firm' reasons, there would be no other firm this equally applies to. In practice it may be hard to find multiple truly unique USPs for every firm, but what you may find more easily is a set of characteristics only present at few other firm. which, when taken together, make your firm unique.
  
  However, I will add that although general reputation/market recognition is an important feature in assessing a firm's practice area, it does not necessarily tell the full story. Other aspects you may consider include: what is the size of the practice area within the firm, and how important of a revenue generator is it? how many practitioners and partners does it have, and does it punch above its weight in terms of impact when compared to the sizes of similarly ranked firms? what is the history of the practice area within the firm - has it seen a lot of recent growth, or has it always been a core part of the firm's practice? and what are the firm's plans in the future for it? does the firm have a very strong reputation only in the UK, or also in other important jurisdictions and globally? are there any specific features of the practice's client base as compared to that of its rivals'? are there any particular sectors that the practice has particular expertise in? how is the practice areas subdivided between different teams? are there any specific high-end mandates that the firm has recently won - and what might you infer from that regarding the market position of the firm's practice area as compared to that of its rivals'? are there any more specific awards and recognitions for the relevant practice area, besides the usual Chambers/Legal 500 rankings? when taken together with other strong practice areas of the firm, are there significant cross-selling opportunities? When you start researching all of these questions, you will find that although initially two practices might have looked very similar because they had the same Chambers band ranking, they have many features that can differentiate them. Once you identify those, you can consider why those more specific features could be of benefit you/be of interest. This way, you can eventually end up with a truly unique practice-area based USP.
  
  
• To give you a more concrete example - when I was applying to Davis Polk, I saw they had a band 5 Chambers UK corporate M&A ranking. Initially, I thought it would be difficult to write a persuasive USP based on that, as there were other firms with higher corporate M&A Chambers UK rankings. However, upon further research, I found out that (i) Davis Polk had s significantly smaller corporate M&A practice than any of the other ranked firms - with less than 1/3 of the total number of practitioners than similarly ranked firms; (ii) Davis Polk was ranked as the most efficient corporate practice in the UK, with the highest Revenue Per Lawyer (RPL) and Revenue Per Partner (RPP) of any firm; (iii) Davis Polk globally had the highest average corporate deal value of any firm - suggesting a low volume/high value model; (iv) Davis Polk had won various corporate/PE deal of the year or team of the year awards. When taking all these factors together, it was easy to think of an USP in terms of Davis Polk a small but extremely high quality practice, which I could then connect to my motivations to be a become a great corporate lawyer and to work in small teams.

Wow @Andrei Radu thank you, I never considered these elements.

 

[l789]

Hey @AS24! Just to add to @Ram Sabaratnam's great response, I've copied bellow an answer I gave to a similar question asked by another user. For context, he asked more broadly about how he can individuate a firm's practice areas beyond just ascertaining whether they are reputable or not (using Legal 500/Chambers rankings). Essentially, their worry was that if you do not find anything more specific, you will not be able to discuss practice areas as a convincing 'Why this firm' reason, as many competitors would have similarly strong reputations for it. While this is a slightly more general analysis of how to use practice areas as a 'Why the firm' reason, I think you will find everything applies in the context of trying to formulate a specific corporate M&A-based motivation.

• I think that it is still fine to discuss a practice area as a reason for why the firm, as long as (i) while the strength/reputation/other relevant features of the practice area may not differentiate the firm from every single competitor, it still differentiates it from most of them; and (ii) if taken in conjunction with your other 'Why the firm' reasons, there would be no other firm this equally applies to. In practice it may be hard to find multiple truly unique USPs for every firm, but what you may find more easily is a set of characteristics only present at few other firm. which, when taken together, make your firm unique.
  
  However, I will add that although general reputation/market recognition is an important feature in assessing a firm's practice area, it does not necessarily tell the full story. Other aspects you may consider include: what is the size of the practice area within the firm, and how important of a revenue generator is it? how many practitioners and partners does it have, and does it punch above its weight in terms of impact when compared to the sizes of similarly ranked firms? what is the history of the practice area within the firm - has it seen a lot of recent growth, or has it always been a core part of the firm's practice? and what are the firm's plans in the future for it? does the firm have a very strong reputation only in the UK, or also in other important jurisdictions and globally? are there any specific features of the practice's client base as compared to that of its rivals'? are there any particular sectors that the practice has particular expertise in? how is the practice areas subdivided between different teams? are there any specific high-end mandates that the firm has recently won - and what might you infer from that regarding the market position of the firm's practice area as compared to that of its rivals'? are there any more specific awards and recognitions for the relevant practice area, besides the usual Chambers/Legal 500 rankings? when taken together with other strong practice areas of the firm, are there significant cross-selling opportunities? When you start researching all of these questions, you will find that although initially two practices might have looked very similar because they had the same Chambers band ranking, they have many features that can differentiate them. Once you identify those, you can consider why those more specific features could be of benefit you/be of interest. This way, you can eventually end up with a truly unique practice-area based USP.
  
  
• To give you a more concrete example - when I was applying to Davis Polk, I saw they had a band 5 Chambers UK corporate M&A ranking. Initially, I thought it would be difficult to write a persuasive USP based on that, as there were other firms with higher corporate M&A Chambers UK rankings. However, upon further research, I found out that (i) Davis Polk had s significantly smaller corporate M&A practice than any of the other ranked firms - with less than 1/3 of the total number of practitioners than similarly ranked firms; (ii) Davis Polk was ranked as the most efficient corporate practice in the UK, with the highest Revenue Per Lawyer (RPL) and Revenue Per Partner (RPP) of any firm; (iii) Davis Polk globally had the highest average corporate deal value of any firm - suggesting a low volume/high value model; (iv) Davis Polk had won various corporate/PE deal of the year or team of the year awards. When taking all these factors together, it was easy to think of an USP in terms of Davis Polk a small but extremely high quality practice, which I could then connect to my motivations to be a become a great corporate lawyer and to work in small teams.

@Andrei Radu this is fantastic, thanks for sharing this!

@Ram Sabaratnam - your insights on this have been equally as valuable!

I’m struggling on a similar issues and this is really helpful! Thank you both so so much!

 

[BonanzaBih_]

Hey @AS24! Just to add to @Ram Sabaratnam's great response, I've copied bellow an answer I gave to a similar question asked by another user. For context, he asked more broadly about how he can individuate a firm's practice areas beyond just ascertaining whether they are reputable or not (using Legal 500/Chambers rankings). Essentially, their worry was that if you do not find anything more specific, you will not be able to discuss practice areas as a convincing 'Why this firm' reason, as many competitors would have similarly strong reputations for it. While this is a slightly more general analysis of how to use practice areas as a 'Why the firm' reason, I think you will find everything applies in the context of trying to formulate a specific corporate M&A-based motivation.

• I think that it is still fine to discuss a practice area as a reason for why the firm, as long as (i) while the strength/reputation/other relevant features of the practice area may not differentiate the firm from every single competitor, it still differentiates it from most of them; and (ii) if taken in conjunction with your other 'Why the firm' reasons, there would be no other firm this equally applies to. In practice it may be hard to find multiple truly unique USPs for every firm, but what you may find more easily is a set of characteristics only present at few other firm. which, when taken together, make your firm unique.
  
  However, I will add that although general reputation/market recognition is an important feature in assessing a firm's practice area, it does not necessarily tell the full story. Other aspects you may consider include: what is the size of the practice area within the firm, and how important of a revenue generator is it? how many practitioners and partners does it have, and does it punch above its weight in terms of impact when compared to the sizes of similarly ranked firms? what is the history of the practice area within the firm - has it seen a lot of recent growth, or has it always been a core part of the firm's practice? and what are the firm's plans in the future for it? does the firm have a very strong reputation only in the UK, or also in other important jurisdictions and globally? are there any specific features of the practice's client base as compared to that of its rivals'? are there any particular sectors that the practice has particular expertise in? how is the practice areas subdivided between different teams? are there any specific high-end mandates that the firm has recently won - and what might you infer from that regarding the market position of the firm's practice area as compared to that of its rivals'? are there any more specific awards and recognitions for the relevant practice area, besides the usual Chambers/Legal 500 rankings? when taken together with other strong practice areas of the firm, are there significant cross-selling opportunities? When you start researching all of these questions, you will find that although initially two practices might have looked very similar because they had the same Chambers band ranking, they have many features that can differentiate them. Once you identify those, you can consider why those more specific features could be of benefit you/be of interest. This way, you can eventually end up with a truly unique practice-area based USP.
  
  
• To give you a more concrete example - when I was applying to Davis Polk, I saw they had a band 5 Chambers UK corporate M&A ranking. Initially, I thought it would be difficult to write a persuasive USP based on that, as there were other firms with higher corporate M&A Chambers UK rankings. However, upon further research, I found out that (i) Davis Polk had s significantly smaller corporate M&A practice than any of the other ranked firms - with less than 1/3 of the total number of practitioners than similarly ranked firms; (ii) Davis Polk was ranked as the most efficient corporate practice in the UK, with the highest Revenue Per Lawyer (RPL) and Revenue Per Partner (RPP) of any firm; (iii) Davis Polk globally had the highest average corporate deal value of any firm - suggesting a low volume/high value model; (iv) Davis Polk had won various corporate/PE deal of the year or team of the year awards. When taking all these factors together, it was easy to think of an USP in terms of Davis Polk a small but extremely high quality practice, which I could then connect to my motivations to be a become a great corporate lawyer and to work in small teams.

Hi Andrei, this is very helpful. Regarding your further research on Davis Polk, what resources did you use?

 

[billyonthespeeddial]

How long do we get to answer for the Simmons VI part of the assessment? trying to practice and it would be nice to know what time limits to set for myself!

2 mins for each question

 

[bangarangbass39]

are we allowed to enquire about our results from the Hogan's WG test?

 

[-legal-]

What questions should I ask the partner at the end of a case study/scenario based interview?